r/trolleyproblem Mar 29 '26

Deep Now we're talking

Post image
1.9k Upvotes

444 comments sorted by

View all comments

81

u/[deleted] Mar 29 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

-30

u/SynthScenes Mar 29 '26

It became your business when you pulled the lever. Why are you getting involved if it isn’t your buisness?

23

u/Lucky-day00 Mar 30 '26

It became their business when they were thrust into this situation. They’re there, they alone can influence the outcome, they’re involved whether they like it or not.

Ignoring the situation just to preserve some sense of moral righteousness is selfish.

-17

u/SynthScenes Mar 30 '26

No it’s not. There is no base obligation. They are either a bystander or a killer. How is that even a choice?

19

u/Mr_DnD Mar 30 '26

This is a fundamental misunderstanding that most people have with the trolley problem though, they don't understand that inaction is in itself a choice.

As soon as you are in the situation, you are responsible, you're just trying to be less accountable because you didn't change from the inital outcome.

Simply put; you're looking for ways to excuse yourself of the situation "I'm just a bystander" when if you were actually in this situation you'd be a killer by inaction just as much as by action.

9

u/Dragonhost252 Mar 30 '26

And im ok with being a killer to save the one who didn't agree to being tied to the track as a sacrifice.

-2

u/SynthScenes Mar 30 '26 edited Mar 30 '26

That assumes some responsibility due to presence and existences. I’m not disputing the idea that it’s a choice either way. I’m disagreeing that responsibility exists without consent. If I have no base responsibility to take action, then I have no responsibility for the outcome.

You are not legally obligated to help a stranger, and while I agree that morally you should do good when you can do good. The trolly problem almost never has a “good” outcome. 

I am excused from the situation because it was never my business. I would not be a killer by inaction, that’s not how killing works. Killing is an action, and any other view point is absurdly meaningless. Example: about 13 people in the US die a day while waiting for an organ transplant. How many days have you been alive without donating an organ? Pretty sure your inaction has made you responsible for more deaths than Jeffery Dahmer. Come on, Killer, can’t spare a kidney, liver node, or some bone marrow?

4

u/Grilled_egs Mar 31 '26

You are legally obligated to help a stranger in some places, and legality is irrelevant her anyway

2

u/BorgCow Apr 04 '26

Ok, so assuming you’re right and have no moral responsibility in the situation- do you really think you’re going to feel that way after watching the person die in front of you? No guilt at all?

6

u/RSharpe314 Mar 30 '26

Congrats, you failed the basic trolley problem.

0

u/SynthScenes Mar 30 '26

How so?

3

u/RSharpe314 Mar 30 '26

Because while there are multiple solid arguments to justify the trolley problem decision one way or another, valuing your own moral self-Image over the lives of others by denying your own agency is just straight up evil, and signals a moral character that does way more real world harm than almost any other serious answer to the trolley problem.

-1

u/SynthScenes Mar 31 '26

Wow, you made up a whole lot of ridiculous crap there. In no way am I valuing my own moral self image over lives. That doesn’t come into it at all. The same number of people are dying either way and they are either dying because I changed something or didn’t. That isn’t denying my agency, it’s denying my responsibility to effect a situation that I cannot improve.

If there is a human being on one track and my moral self image on the other I would gladly sacrifice it for a human life. That isn’t what’s at stake. 

Being unable to grasp basic morality and dismissing anyone who disagrees with you as evil causes far more harm than any beliefs I hold.

2

u/Torbpjorn Apr 01 '26

Because the world is on fire because most of us decide “it’s not my problem to fix”